https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158947 Reopening of a completed assessment under section 35 was held unjustified where the alleged stock omission was explained by disputed transactions, transit shortage, damage, and missing delivery records, leaving no sufficient material to infer escapement of turnover. Rejection of accounts and best judgment estimation were also found unsustainable because they rested on suspicion and adverse inference rather than concrete defects, reliable corroboration, or a demonstrable suppression pattern. The assessment could not be sustained on either ground, and the return already filed had to be accepted. en-us Fri, 04 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2013 16:12:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158947 Reopening of a completed assessment under section 35 was held unjustified where the alleged stock omission was explained by disputed transactions, transit shortage, damage, and missing delivery records, leaving no sufficient material to infer escapement of turnover. Rejection of accounts and best judgment estimation were also found unsustainable because they rested on suspicion and adverse inference rather than concrete defects, reliable corroboration, or a demonstrable suppression pattern. The assessment could not be sustained on either ground, and the return already filed had to be accepted. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 04 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=158947